[Pkg-openldap-devel] Recommendation for ldbm to bdb

[Torsten Landschoff]

--7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Matthijs,=20

On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 01:28:10PM +0200, Matthijs Mohlmann wrote:
> Here the patch (with svn diff) that recommends bdb.

Great, thanks. I hope it's okay to discuss the changes for a bit...

Generally what I don't like is that the changes are tied to changing
ldbm to bdb. I'd expect that some day the hdb backend will be the
recommended one so I'd like to replace the invokation of
configure_ldbm_to_bdb to something like

	change_backend ldbm bdb

or something along that line.=20

> What the patch does:
> if the user has ldbm in the current configuration
> ask for switching to bdb (see configure_dumping).

Quoting the template for that change:

> +_Description: Changing database backend.
> + It is highly recommended to use the BDB backend. This is also the recom=
mended
> + choice of the OpenLDAP developers. The LDBM backend has proven to be mo=
re
> + reliable in earlier versions of OpenLDAP. (Versions 2.1.30 and below)
> + .
> + When using the BDB backend make sure you configure BDB properly. For=20
> + information to do so, see: http://www.openldap.org/faq/data/cache/893.h=
tml.

I think it is a bad idea to mention that LDBM is more stable in earlier
versions.=20

Given that we had only problems with people running ldbm I think we
should even enforce changing the backend during upgrade. Comments?

Thanks again!

	Torsten

--7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCiuVAdQgHtVUb5EcRAtITAJ0cO1LA/qol28jh/30SwNsXHskTEwCfb18h
c+7gSu1oMAKrXw2rcDxheS8=
=w0gQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--7AUc2qLy4jB3hD7Z--